Wednesday, December 26, 2012

In summary, it appears that in one brief, closed-door meeting, with only a synthesis report meant for policy makers as evidence (Hassol 2004), the PBSG got the most influential conservation group in the world [the IUCN] to accept that predicted effects of future global warming was more of a threat to polar bears than over-hunting....It appears to me that when the PBSG did not have the evidence to support listing polar bears as Vulnerable under the re-vamped IUCN criteria in 1996 (version 2.3) – because they were doing so well – the Group simply switched the primary threat from unregulated over-hunting to future global warming. Their reasons for seeming to prefer “Vulnerable” over “Least Concern” are not stated explicitly.

“Far from being “carbon neutral,” wood-burning biomass actually emits more carbon dioxide (the primary global warming greenhouse gas) per unit of energy produced than either gas or coal. Yes, trees can grow back and reabsorb that carbon, but that growth takes many years. The most recent studies show that

The renewability of wood is also questionable, as forests would be threatened by any meaningful increase in electricity generation using biomass as fuel. Replacing just 10 percent of the coal used in Pennsylvania would require more than 12.8 million green tons of wood per year — far more than the state’s annual commercial wood harvest (about 5 million tons).“

In other words, they are focused on 2% of Earth’s area and ignoring the record cold and snow in Alaska (part of the US last time I checked), Eastern Europe, Russia and Asia.

The rest of their claims are blatant lies and omissions. Temperatures were much hotter during the Dust Bowl. Sandy was a freak storm aggravated by some of the highest tides of the year and a rare blast of October Arctic cold.

They are counting mild winter temperatures as “extreme weather.” The US is experiencing a record lull in severe hurricanes and had one of the quietest years on record for tornadoes.